Geo-engineering does not offer an easy way out

No effective, affordable, low risk solutions available

If we are able to influence the earth’s CO2 density and climate in a negative way, it seems logical to assume that we are also able to influence it in a positive way. That is the basic idea behind geo-engineering solutions to climate change. Those solutions generally include such ideas as afforestation, CO2 air capture, ocean fertilisation, cloud albedo (using sea water spray to whiten clouds and increase cloud reflectivity), surface albedo (using specifically coloured roofing and paving materials), creating stratospheric sulphur aerosols, and space solar reflectors.

Is CCS geo-engineering?

A recent article on the subject in the Financial Times also includes CO2 capture at the stack ('Carbon Capture and Storage', CCS) among other geo-engineering solutions. This is noteworthy primarily since this solution is generally seen as more realistic. CCS already receives significant amounts of R&D funding, in contrast with the other geo-engineering solutions.

No solution scores high on all criteria

The Financial Times article ranks all geo-engineering solutions according to four criteria: effectiveness, affordability, timeliness, and safety (risk). Most solutions score poorly on the first two criteria. An exception is the use of stratospheric sulphur aerosols, but that is considered to be a solution with high risk. CCS scores high on safety and timeliness, but only in the medium range when it comes to affordability and effectiveness.

No easy way out

The bottom line is that we still do not know enough about the geo-engineering solutions to judge them thoroughly. However at present, it seems very unlikely that they will offer us an easy way out of the climate change problem.

Instead of the logic expressed in the first sentence of this article, there is perhaps another kind of logic that prevails here, namely the one expressed in the famous Albert Einstein quote: 'The significant problems we face cannot be solved at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them'.